Yeah hockey is a different breed of a game. It's very organic--you don't have a playbook to tell you where to be all the time. You just...do it. That's learned through playing hockey 24/7. Every player at that level can think the game through in incredible ways. When I played, I would kind of black out when I was on the ice--I wouldn't remember much of what happened, where I was, who was where. However, these athletes know exactly what happened on their last shift, and probably the shift before that. They can visualize the game, internalize it. Malkin probably thinks the game at a level higher than 90% of the NHL--which think the game at a level higher than 99.9% of everyone else.

farnham16 wrote:Every single guy in the NHL has been playing his entire life. Its impossible to make it to the NHL and not know the game well. Impossible.

That is not what you said whatsoever. You are saying that since they made it to the NHL then there is no possible way they can be dumb. Please note I didn't use the dumb word, someone else did, but be that as it may they certainly can make the NHL with some lack luster thinking. Yes they have been playing a long time, but does that mean they are the sharpest skate in the locker room because they have been playing a long time. When everyone else in the NHL has been playing for a long time...then you just made my argument for me. Unless you are saying the NHL is full of robots.

every player has been playing a long time. They all have different learning curves and they all have a different intelligence level.

There are some people in this world that no matter how much they try to learn, how much they are taught, can only get so far.

farnham16 wrote:Every single guy in the NHL has been playing his entire life. Its impossible to make it to the NHL and not know the game well. Impossible.

That is not what you said whatsoever. You are saying that since they made it to the NHL then there is no possible way they can be dumb. Please note I didn't use the dumb word, someone else did, but be that as it may they certainly can make the NHL with some lack luster thinking. Yes they have been playing a long time, but does that mean they are the sharpest skate in the locker room because they have been playing a long time. When everyone else in the NHL has been playing for a long time...then you just made my argument for me. Unless you are saying the NHL is full of robots.

every player has been playing a long time. They all have different learning curves and they all have a different intelligence level.

There are some people in this world that no matter how much they try to learn, how much they are taught, can only get so far.

Dude, that is not what I said at all and not the argument I am making.

My opinion is that no player that makes it to the NHL has low hockey IQ. That does not mean at all that NHL players don't do dumb things on the ice sometimes. Of course they do. But that doesn't mean they don't know the game when they make mistakes. Thats what Mr Dump has been trying to say is the case with Malkin and Letang.

Again, not one player in the NHL has low hockey IQ.

Last edited by farnham16 on Sun May 19, 2013 11:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Holy ****, Malkin and Letang don't have to be Fields Medalists to have high Hockey IQs. I will agree that Letang can't play **** for defense at times, but I don't directly relate that to his intelligence. There are parts of his game that have simply failed to develop.

farnham16 wrote:And there is not ONE player in the NHL that has low hockey IQ. Not one single player. You do not get to that level by not knowing the game well. Its impossible.

The low hockey IQ is the dumbest argument ever.

Sure, just like no player in the NHL actually sucks. But I will still say that players like Cam Barker suck and it will be true. It's a general term versus their peers in the league, of course if you put any of these players in a pickup game they'd be by far the smartest hockey player.

I don't agree with his point at all, but criticizing aspects of a player's game is meant comparatively against other players in the league, not compared to you and me.

Scott wrote:How did those top two lines do? How many nice chances did that top line have tonight? Again, zero and zero

I'm not sure how to respond if this was your take of the game. Honestly, I don't know what to say. Pens pretty much dominated Ottawa in terms of chances. Maybe you missed Dupuis drilling the post. Maybe you missed a couple great plays by Malkin and his line. I can't respond if this is what you took away. It would be pointless for us to debate at this point.

yes Dupuis hit the post. He made an amazing shot against the grain that was one inch too wide. How far away was that shot? Very high slot. I already commented on Malkin's 13 deke move attempt..so you obviously don't read to completion.

We are all in agreement that Malkin is a top 5 player in the NHL, right? At worst, top 10?

When you say they can only get so far, how far are we planning on him getting? This reminds me of the old edog arguments. He'll never reach his potential blah blah blah. So if he was "smart" or had "hockey IQ" at all, where would he be? It sounds like he's so far off in the minds of Scott and murphy that if he only could think a little, he would make Wayne Gretzky look like Tanner Glass. I'll just end with: I don't understand what is being said at all. He's not smart or doesn't have hockey IQ, yet he is one of the best players in the best league at the sport. Lucky him, I guess.

farnham16 wrote:And there is not ONE player in the NHL that has low hockey IQ. Not one single player. You do not get to that level by not knowing the game well. Its impossible.

The low hockey IQ is the dumbest argument ever.

Sure, just like no player in the NHL actually sucks. But I will still say that players like Cam Barker suck and it will be true. It's a general term versus their peers in the league, of course if you put any of these players in a pickup game they'd be by far the smartest hockey player.

I don't agree with his point at all, but criticizing aspects of a player's game is meant comparatively against other players in the league, not compared to you and me.

I agree with that. Only that's not what Murphy dump is saying. He is saying Malkin and Letang don't know the game well. His agrument has never been about certain players knowing the game better than others. At least he has never said that is what its about.

Scott wrote:How did those top two lines do? How many nice chances did that top line have tonight? Again, zero and zero

I'm not sure how to respond if this was your take of the game. Honestly, I don't know what to say. Pens pretty much dominated Ottawa in terms of chances. Maybe you missed Dupuis drilling the post. Maybe you missed a couple great plays by Malkin and his line. I can't respond if this is what you took away. It would be pointless for us to debate at this point.

yes Dupuis hit the post. He made an amazing shot against the grain that was one inch too wide. How far away was that shot? Very high slot. I already commented on Malkin's 13 deke move attempt..so you obviously don't read to completion.

I don't read all the GDT, so the last comment is correct. I can only comment on what I see.

So clearly they didn't have zero good chances if Dupuis hit the post on a shot. Which means they are already better than you credit them for.

farnham16 wrote:And there is not ONE player in the NHL that has low hockey IQ. Not one single player. You do not get to that level by not knowing the game well. Its impossible.

The low hockey IQ is the dumbest argument ever.

Sure, just like no player in the NHL actually sucks. But I will still say that players like Cam Barker suck and it will be true. It's a general term versus their peers in the league, of course if you put any of these players in a pickup game they'd be by far the smartest hockey player.

I don't agree with his point at all, but criticizing aspects of a player's game is meant comparatively against other players in the league, not compared to you and me.

I agree with that. Only that's not what Murphy dump is saying. He is saying Malkin and Letang don't know the game well. His agrument has never been about certain players knowing the game better than others. At least he has never said that is what its about.

Yeah agreed, I have him foed and don't read a single thing he says. I just wanted to make sure we were on the same page there.

farnham16 wrote:And there is not ONE player in the NHL that has low hockey IQ. Not one single player. You do not get to that level by not knowing the game well. Its impossible.

The low hockey IQ is the dumbest argument ever.

Sure, just like no player in the NHL actually sucks. But I will still say that players like Cam Barker suck and it will be true. It's a general term versus their peers in the league, of course if you put any of these players in a pickup game they'd be by far the smartest hockey player.

I don't agree with his point at all, but criticizing aspects of a player's game is meant comparatively against other players in the league, not compared to you and me.

I agree with that. Only that's not what Murphy dump is saying. He is saying Malkin and Letang don't know the game well. His agrument has never been about certain players knowing the game better than others. At least he has never said that is what its about.

Yeah agreed, I have him foed and don't read a single thing he says. I just wanted to make sure we were on the same page there.

farnham16 wrote:Dude, that is not what I said at all and not the argument I am making.

My opinion is that no player that makes it to the NHL has low hockey IQ. That does not mean at all that NHL players don't do dumb things on the ice sometimes. Of course they do. But that doesn't mean they don't know the game when they make mistakes. Thats what Mr Dump has been trying to say is the case with Malkin and Letang.

Again, not one player in the NHL has low hockey IQ.

But something has to give here. If Malkin has a high hockey IQ, but keeps making a low hockey IQ play, then what do you call that? Is he a dumb hockey genius? Seriously think about this a moment. One person is saying he is dumb, you are saying he can't be because he is in the NHL. Then someone says no NHL player can have a low hockey IQ. But if he is hockey smart why would he make some less than intelligent hockey decisions. So because right after making that ill advised low hockey smarts type of play....he says to himself, Dear Malkin, that was a dumb play, then he really isn't dumb, but just had a bump in the road?

I wouldn't trade Malkin for any player in the NHL but comparing him to other NHLer's in the IQ department only...he is not topping the list. Sorry.

bhaw wrote:I don't read all the GDT, so the last comment is correct. I can only comment on what I see.

So clearly they didn't have zero good chances if Dupuis hit the post on a shot. Which means they are already better than you credit them for.

All the GDT has nothing to do with it. You don't read the entire single post because you quoted part of it and started typing.

Notice again how I said Dupuis shot was from how far. Did you see the shot live? How far away was the shot. It wasn't that close. Dupuis made a brilliant shot attempt that was one inch too wide.

Other chances? Where were they? Good clean scoring chances in close..where were they? We must have watched two different games because the game I watched had crosby's line held in check minus the HIGH slot Dupuis shot, Malkins line held in check minus the 13 deke move, not even generated by the line as a group..but by Malkin single handed attempt.

The other 58 mins how were the scoring chances in this game from the top two lines. But Dan sure kept trying to make that all work.

murphydump55 wrote:People will soon realize that Malkin is a great hockey player, just not a a really smart one. He retaliates in stupid ways, he has a history of taking a ton of horrible penalties (although he's been good lately), he has boneheaded turnovers, and has a tendency to float in the defensive zone at times. He can be a beast in the defensive zone, and he can be a huge liability. Consistency in the defensive zone would go a long way for him.

Letang is much the same. Bad temper, takes bad penalties, gets rattled and drawn into stuff just like Malkin does. He has horrible turnovers, piss poor defensive play at times, can't make decisions on the PP, hits too many shin pads still, misses the net too often still, and can't read and react very well throughout the game. Tons of talent, amazing skill and skater, just not high up there in the hockey sense department.

Now everyone can freak out and defend them, but more and more people are starting to realize this. I'm not trying to convince you, I know I won't. You'll eventually start to see it too. I love having these guys, they just have to be smarter.

We won a couple of games in the Islander series that we probably should have lost. We lost this game but based on our play in regulation we should have won. It evens out that way sometimes in the playoffs. We played well on defense for the first 59 minutes, but made it easy on their goalie by not getting enough traffic in front of the net. If we correct that and everything remains the same we go back home up 3-1. Sorry for sounding positive on a morning when the masses want the majority of the team hung in the public square.

Yeah Letang and Malkin were clueless on that goal BUT the coaching staff appeared to want the Pens to sit back on the power play and run out the clock. It was apparent that we did not attempt to score on it since there was no urgency. He should of had Malkin off and the first team penalty kill on for the final minute. Also when did #2 change the name on the back of his jersey to "Giveaway"? Niski is horrible.

Sometimes you need help from the guy behind the bench. The decision to have that group of 5 on the ice with 30 seconds left protecting a 1-0 lead was awful. I'm fine with Martin, but the other four? They should've been nailed to the bench. Maybe a case can be made for Sutter being out there, but he's been soft and invisible and looks to be completely overwhelemed at times. Probably not the place for him. Malkin, Letang and Kunitz? Why? All three made mistakes on the play, but they never should've been in a spot to make a mistake in the first place. Sending that group out there, who probably had not shared a shift together all night, would be like sending out Glass, Adams, Sutter, Murray, Orpik and Morrow coming over the boards as the sixth skater to try to tie it with 30 seconds left when down by one. In other words, it makes no sense. A little common sense and they're likely up 3-0 this morning.